Re: Glagolitic in Unicode 4.1

From: Kenneth Whistler (
Date: Mon May 23 2005 - 15:17:58 CDT

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: hebrew font conversion"

    Strahinya asked:

    > and I'm most curious about
    > the lack of ``yeriy'', since it is really one unitary and standalone Old Slavic
    > (and thus also Glagolitic) letter. If ``yeriy'' is in the Cyrillic part, it
    > should also be in the Glagolitic part of Unicode.

    Such analogies don't always hold.

    At any rate, I expect the reason is based on ISO 6861, which
    analyzes the "yeriy" as a digraph, namely <U+2C4F yeru, U+2C3B i>,
    and associates it with the Old Cyrillic "yeriy", which would, of
    course, be shown with an OCS version of a font, using U+044B

    So the Glagolitic form is perfectly representable -- just using
    a digraph instead of a single encoded character.

    The burden of proof at this point would be for demonstrating that
    a digraphic representation is insufficient, so that a separate
    Glagolitic digraph for this would need to be added to the standard.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 23 2005 - 15:19:19 CDT